In a panel discussion at the iGames Summit Thursday titled "Where Do We Go From Here?" Rebecca Lynn of Morgenthaler Ventures moderated a discussion about the future of iPhone gaming, involving Brett Seyler of Garage Games, Michael Chang of Greystripe, David Helgason of Unity Technologies, and Greg Yardley of Pinch Media.

Lynn noted that the iPhone 3.0 announcement had great timing, and added that hardware support for gaming peripherals and in-game micro-transactions were all exciting developments. She then asked the panel what they thought were the most exciting iPhone 3.0 announcements.

Chang, who works for a mobile display advertising network that serves full scree interstitial ads for Burger King and Axe body spray, said the new 3.0 features were "publisher focused," citing support for micro-transactions and the ability to show in-app Google maps, allowing advertising to show potential buyers how to drive to retail outlet, for example.

Seyler also talked about in-app purchases and said the new ability "really opens up a lot of opportunities." Yardley, who represents mobile analytics firm Pinch Media, also cited in-app purchases as an important new feature that is company would definitely be "tracking, optimizing and advising" his clients with in to make the most from in their apps.

Asked what missing features they had wished for in iPhone 3.0, the panel appeared stumped. "The 3.0 release is more than I expected to be honest," Seyler answered. "I was really really impressed with this." He recommended that Apple keep working on its hardware to keep it competitive.

Asked how gameplay changes with the new 3.0 platform features, Seyler said that with 3.0's iTunes library access to developers there will be "a lot more of users' own multimedia in in-game mashups."

Yardley noted that only a small number of applications get repeat usage. New push notifications will, and Facebook and other social interaction already does, result in radically different user interaction, Yardley said. His company's analytics show that "some people buy things like crazy," Yardley said, while "other people never pay for anything." Using new monetization models that support both direct payments and ad supported play will be important to reach the widest audience.

With 27,000 apps in the app store, Lynn asked next, what untapped opportunity is there? Yardley said that if your app isn't featured, you're not getting nearly the downloads. One feature he'd like to see in 3.0 is the ability to track conversions through iTunes and options for developers to better promote their own apps.

Asked if the iPhone will ever be a threat to console and PC games, Seyler answered that it already is. He noted that his company supports development on every gaming platform, and that he personally has a Nintendo DS and Sony PSP, but that he only regularly carries his iPhone.

Asked what competitors might challenge the iPhone, the panel agreed with Helgason's comment that it "remains to be seen." Other rival platforms need to unify their offerings he said. Chang added Apple had done a great job of building an ecosystem around the iPhone rather than just advertising it.

Responding to a question about how the developer mix of the App Store is likely to change, Yardley said a lot of early successes came from nimble small developers, while big developers with familiar "existing IP" are now gaining in impact, starting with titles such as Sega's Super Monkey Ball.

In terms of marketing big games and setting them apart from the piles of cheaper, simpler titles, the panel discussed how Steam creates per-publisher stores to leverage brand loyalty and promote games to users. However, in addressing the rumors of a "premium app store," where big developers could charge more for their games without the distraction of smaller developer's offerings, Yardley said that iTunes' level playing field was a core strength.

Yardley noted that while the App Store is tilted toward $1 games, there are still lots of opportunities for more expensive, sophisticated games to reach the top ten list. He recommending that developers "do not shoot yourself in the foot by going too low too fast," and to instead price their apps as high as they think they can and then offer a discount afterward it if isn't selling.

A game developer in the audience recommended that Apple add the capacity for developers to add video demos for games listed in the Apps Store, and asked about the potential for adding "real, good quality video in games." Currently, games are limited to playing full screen video through the built in QuickTime Player. The panel noted that 3.0 opens up both streaming and access to the user's iPod library, but that the details of the 3.0 SDK are still begin reviewed by developers.

The additions to the iPhone OS, the new SDK APIs and the use of the previously unallowed options like BT and the 30-pin connector are going to be massive for the gaming market. When I consider the number of people I know with iPhones/iPods and DS/PSPs the combo could actually save them money overall, since they can buy one device instead of multiple and have it be a more powerful device with more and better HW features and options.

I think Sony and Nintendo are going to have to work hard to compete.

PS: The new "in app" purchases could be great for companies, like Atari, who have loads of classic games. They can make a single, official emulator and then sell their entire library through that emulator.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

A game developer in the audience recommended that Apple add the capacity for developers to add video demos for games listed in the Apps Store, and asked about the potential for adding "real, good quality video in games." Currently, games are limited to playing full screen video through the built in QuickTime Player. The panel noted that 3.0 opens up both streaming and access to the user's iPod library, but that the details of the 3.0 SDK are still begin reviewed by developers.

The "market" has already answered this. Every app in the top 50 has a YouTube video, and any app worth it's salt also has a video.

The additions to the iPhone OS, the new SDK APIs and the use of the previously unallowed options like BT and the 30-pin connector are going to be massive for the gaming market. When I consider the number of people I know with iPhones/iPods and DS/PSPs the combo could actually save them money overall, since they can buy one device instead of multiple and have it be a more powerful device with more and better HW features and options.

I think Sony and Nintendo are going to have to work hard to compete.

PS: The new "in app" purchases could be great for companies, like Atari, who have loads of classic games. They can make a single, official emulator and then sell their entire library through that emulator.

Many of the classic video games already have "generic" equivalents available on the App Store. The longer companies like Atari and Sega wait, the more time faster smaller devs have to rip them off.

Chockenberry mentioned they still didn't address the most important request developers have: demo apps. Apple said free apps remain free, but if they allowed developers that in-app commerce facility for within free apps that would solve the whole demo app situation. People would get the free version (demo) and be able to upgrade to the full version in app. Demoware!

Clearly though that would bring the numbers of apps being sold downwards as Apple could no longer call that two app downloads, when they user is not downloading another app, just improving it. It's all a bit fiddly.

The "market" has already answered this. Every app in the top 50 has a YouTube video, and any app worth it's salt also has a video.

I didn't know this existed. Unless Apple includes an option to try an app this is very coo. They can expire video, but for apps it would have to be more complex than play or not to play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Many of the classic video games already have "generic" equivalents available on the App Store. The longer companies like Atari and Sega wait, the more time faster smaller devs have to rip them off.

If you mean games that are like classic video games, but not the actual video games, I've seen a few of them. But I want the actual classic game. And I want to enter, for example, just the Atari icon on my Home Screen to see a list of all the games I bought from Atari within the app. (I think I really just a folder/file hierarchy in the iPhone.)

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

I refuse to get sucked into the in-app commerce where developers nickle and dime you to death. It does not take a genius to see that every developer is going to be doing everything possible to work in these micro payments into their apps and games.

I mean honestly, who wants 20 games on their iPhone/iPod Touch, each one of them asking for just a little bit of extra cash for a few new levels, features, maps, and so on into infinity. Anyone who thinks that developers are not going to abuse this is crazy.

Then there are those who claim that those developers will suffer a backlash from the community if they abuse in app commerce but have not paid attention to the amount of utter garbage people spend $.99 on without complaining. iFart or iThrowUp anyone?

In case I have not been clear, in app commerce is just evil and will quickly get out of control. Greed is just funny that way.

Chockenberry mentioned they still didn't address the most important request developers have: demo apps. Apple said free apps remain free, but if they allowed developers that in-app commerce facility for within free apps that would solve the whole demo app situation. People would get the free version (demo) and be able to upgrade to the full version in app. Demoware!

Clearly though that would bring the numbers of apps being sold downwards as Apple could no longer call that two app downloads, when they user is not downloading another app, just improving it. It's all a bit fiddly.

I think Apple counts every actual app download. At least I wold since it's not automatic requiring actual user interaction to get teh update and it is a whole new download not just a partial.

But I think the reason that Apple is preventing free apps being able to include costly in-app purchases is to help protect the ecosystem. I don't want to get a free app just to find that I can't use all the features or access all the levels advertised without paying more. If they want to have a lite and full version as seperate apps, I'm fine with that, as the free app will still be free and it won't seem like trojan. It's essentially six of one half-dozen of the other (to use the cliché), but the marketing effect to the consumer is very different, IMO.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

Why doe it always have to be referred to as "iPhone gaming". The iPod Touch is surpassing the iPhone day by day. As long the iPhone remains locked into AT&T, it stagnates.

Huh? The iPod Touch's only HW benefit over the iPhone is the slightly higher-clocked CPU. Every other SW or HW category they are equal or it loses to the iPhone in terms of capability.

The iPod Touch is certainly popular and has a great deal of potential, but with so many people wanting cell phones the number of current iPhone users is greater than the iPod Touch, despite the contractual obligations and high monthly fees. Perhaps that will change in the future, but for right now the iPhone reigns between the two.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

Huh? The iPod Touch's only HW benefit over the iPhone is the slightly higher-clocked CPU. Every other SW or HW category they are equal or it loses to the iPhone in terms of capability.

The iPod Touch is certainly popular and has a great deal of potential, but with so many people wanting cell phones the number of current iPhone users is greater than the iPod Touch, despite the contractual obligations and high monthly fees. Perhaps that will change in the future, but for right now the iPhone reigns between the two.

I think he meant sales of the iPod touch are surpassing the iPhone, which is true, but I agree with you, the iPhone is more attractive. People with an iPhone have it on them all the time, whereas people with an iPod Touch don't have it on them nearly as much. Also, it is called iPhone gaming because this allows Apple to keep this category seperate in the consumers' mind instead of calling it iPod Touch gaming and getting it mashed in with iPod classic/nano gaming.

Huh? The iPod Touch's only HW benefit over the iPhone is the slightly higher-clocked CPU. Every other SW or HW category they are equal or it loses to the iPhone in terms of capability.

The iPod Touch is certainly popular and has a great deal of potential, but with so many people wanting cell phones the number of current iPhone users is greater than the iPod Touch, despite the contractual obligations and high monthly fees. Perhaps that will change in the future, but for right now the iPhone reigns between the two.

I think he meant sales of the iPod touch are surpassing the iPhone, which is true, but I agree with you, the iPhone is more attractive. People with an iPhone have it onthem all the time, whereas people with an iPod Touch don't have it on them nearly as much. Also, it is called iPhone gaming because this allows Apple to keep this category seperate in the consumers' mind instead of calling it iPod Touch gaming and getting it mashed in with iPod classic/nano gaming.

I think he meant sales of the iPod touch are surpassing the iPhone, which is true, but I agree with you, the iPhone is more attractive. People with an iPhone have it on them all the time, whereas people with an iPod Touch don't have it on them nearly as much. Also, it is called iPhone gaming because this allows Apple to keep this category seperate in the consumers' mind instead of calling it iPod Touch gaming and getting it mashed in with iPod classic/nano gaming.

Surpass means to exceed, even if we account for the 9 week jump the iPhone had over the iPod Touch by removing all the original iPhone sales up to that point the iPhone still has sold more units than the iPod Touch. This isn't even taking into account the fact the Touch was sold in pretty much every market that the iPod is sold, while the iPhone had to wait a half year for a handle of countries to be added and a year or more for the current 80 to be added.

The Pod Touch is a great device, but surprisingly the iPhone is beating it. I presume that the value added of combining your phone with your iPod and having internet everywhere (and maybe a camera) helps push people to that device.

Quote:

Originally Posted by teckstud

The iPod Touch is surpassing the iPhone day by day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by teckstud

iPhone sold 17mil - iPod Touch sold 13mil.

That is the point I made. The iPhone is in the lead, it is not surpassed by the Touch.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

Surpass means to exceed, even if we account for the 9 week jump the iPhone had over the iPod Touch by removing all the original iPhone sales up to that point the iPhone still has sold more units than the iPod Touch. This isn't even taking into account the fact the Touch was sold in pretty much every market that the iPod is sold, while the iPhone had to wait a half year for a handle of countries to be added and a year or more for the current 80 to be added.

The Pod Touch is a great device, but surprisingly the iPhone is beating it. I presume that the value added of combining your phone with your iPod and having internet everywhere (and maybe a camera) helps push people to that device.

That is the point I made. The iPhone is in the lead, it is not surpassed by the Touch.

Now I know you are way better than that. Did I state that is has surpassed the iPhone- NOoo.
I said it is surpassing as we speak. How can you deny that it is not growing at a faster rate than the iPhone now. Look at the numbers sold last year compared to this year. Now who is growing faster. Who would have predicted 13 million for the Touch?? Last year was nowhere near that amount.

Now I know you are way better than that. Did I state that is has surpassed the iPhone- NOoo.
I said it is surpassing as we speak. How can you deny that it is not growing at a faster rate than the iPhone now. Look at the numbers sold last year compared to this year. Now who is growing faster.

I would not use the word surpassing like that unless you directly state that it's surpassing in growth. They are very different things.

Quote:

Who would have predicted 13 million for the Touch?? Last year was nowhere near that amount.

I would have thought the Touch had at least twice the number of iPhone unit sales at this point. They were in a lot more markets and have less restrictions and TCO.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

The additions to the iPhone OS, the new SDK APIs and the use of the previously unallowed options like BT and the 30-pin connector are going to be massive for the gaming market. When I consider the number of people I know with iPhones/iPods and DS/PSPs the combo could actually save them money overall, since they can buy one device instead of multiple and have it be a more powerful device with more and better HW features and options.

I think Sony and Nintendo are going to have to work hard to compete.

PS: The new "in app" purchases could be great for companies, like Atari, who have loads of classic games. They can make a single, official emulator and then sell their entire library through that emulator.

In terms of building an online store presence, perhaps, although Sony already has the Playstation Network.

But as far as the actual games, Zelda, Mario, Pokemon, some of Sony's original titles like GoW, GT, Wipeout, Rachet and Clank, etc, will out sell the derivate games and ripoffs current available in the app store.

Underestimating established game franchises just displays complete misunderstanding of the gaming market, but then again, Apple always has. I think that the Touch/iPhone could do well, but to say that Sony and of all companies, Nintendo has to compete, is laughable.

Nintendo knows gaming better than anyone, and I haven't owned a Nintendo since I was a kid, but they've been printing money with Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon.

Is it just me or did Kasper's Automated Slave forget to proof read this? I counted at least 8 errors in this article that made reading it sound as though a teenager wrote it. Come on AppleInsider, at least spell check this stuff first.

Although I think the original game would go quite well on the iPhone, they couldn't do any worse than some of the other efforts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by guinness

In terms of building an online store presence, perhaps, although Sony already has the Playstation Network.

But as far as the actual games, Zelda, Mario, Pokemon, some of Sony's original titles like GoW, GT, Wipeout, Rachet and Clank, etc, will out sell the derivate games and ripoffs current available in the app store.

Underestimating established game franchises just displays complete misunderstanding of the gaming market, but then again, Apple always has. I think that the Touch/iPhone could do well, but to say that Sony and of all companies, Nintendo has to compete, is laughable.

Nintendo knows gaming better than anyone, and I haven't owned a Nintendo since I was a kid, but they've been printing money with Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.

Chockenberry mentioned they still didn't address the most important request developers have: demo apps. Apple said free apps remain free, but if they allowed developers that in-app commerce facility for within free apps that would solve the whole demo app situation. People would get the free version (demo) and be able to upgrade to the full version in app. Demoware!

Clearly though that would bring the numbers of apps being sold downwards as Apple could no longer call that two app downloads, when they user is not downloading another app, just improving it. It's all a bit fiddly.

I don't think it's a good idea. I was asked by a parent of a student in my daughter's HS about getting free apps, and then having to pay to get it working properly. She was concerned that her daughter would download all these free apps, but end up spending a lot of money on the unlocks.

I explained that a free app was a free appalways, and that if she wanted to upgrade it, she would have to go and then buy the paid one. She felt better about that.

The point here is that it's too easy to just click "buy" in an app if you're in the middle of a level. It takes extra effort to go and get the paid version, so you can think about it first.

With apps that you pay for in the beginning, you know you have more stuff that you could buy.

It's difficult to explain, but I think Apple properly feels that the free, but crippled, and you can buy concept, is too easy to abuse.

Now I know you are way better than that. Did I state that is has surpassed the iPhone- NOoo.
I said it is surpassing as we speak. How can you deny that it is not growing at a faster rate than the iPhone now. Look at the numbers sold last year compared to this year. Now who is growing faster. Who would have predicted 13 million for the Touch?? Last year was nowhere near that amount.

Do you have the numbers? I'm curious about that. Apple doesn't break them out of the iPod category, I believe. We just heard about it at the end of the year.

In terms of building an online store presence, perhaps, although Sony already has the Playstation Network.

But as far as the actual games, Zelda, Mario, Pokemon, some of Sony's original titles like GoW, GT, Wipeout, Rachet and Clank, etc, will out sell the derivate games and ripoffs current available in the app store.

Underestimating established game franchises just displays complete misunderstanding of the gaming market, but then again, Apple always has. I think that the Touch/iPhone could do well, but to say that Sony and of all companies, Nintendo has to compete, is laughable.

Nintendo knows gaming better than anyone, and I haven't owned a Nintendo since I was a kid, but they've been printing money with Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon.

I remember a lot of companies over the decades who "knew" gaming. Most are out of business.

Just because Nintendo is on top now doesn't mean that it will remain there.

Sony was on top for years. Now they are number three.

And as far as the franchises go, big deal! They come and go as well.

What matters is mindshare. That changes. Momentum changes.

Old game franchises run out of steam. The third game in a series is rarely as good as the first or second, though sometimes it is.

There will be game franchises that start on the iPhone too.

And if many people buy games on the iPod/iTouch platform, then it's a successful gaming platform. Period!

Just because Nintendo is on top now doesn't mean that it will remain there.

Nintendo single-handedly resurrected the gaming industry in the 1980's, and is again THE force to be reckoned with nearly 30 years later.

Quote:

And as far as the franchises go, big deal! They come and go as well.

As another reader pointed out, franchises can and will stay around for a long while if you know what to do with them. Mario and Zelda have been around since the 80's and are still some of the highest rated and most profitable franchises in the world.

Quote:

Old game franchises run out of steam. The third game in a series is rarely as good as the first or second, though sometimes it is.

Again, Mario and Zelda are perfect examples to disprove your statement. Plus, nearly everyone who grew up with Nintendo would agree that Super Mario Bros. 3 is the best Mario game on the original Nintendo, and that Zelda on the Super NES is one of, if not the, best Zelda ever made, both number 3 in their respective franchises.

[QUOTE=hittrj01;1393163]Nintendo single-handedly resurrected the gaming industry in the 1980's, and is again THE force to be reckoned with nearly 30 years later./quote]

They didn't resurrect anything.

In fact, they were third for years, behind Sony, until Sony had problems with the PS3.

Quote:

As another reader pointed out, franchises can and will stay around for a long while if you know what to do with them. Mario and Zelda have been around since the 80's and are still some of the highest rated and most profitable franchises in the world.

Sure, but most have disappeared. The odds are poor.

Quote:

Again, Mario and Zelda are perfect examples to disprove your statement. Plus, nearly everyone who grew up with Nintendo would agree that Super Mario Bros. 3 is the best Mario game on the original Nintendo, and that Zelda on the Super NES is one of, if not the, best Zelda ever made, both number 3 in their respective franchises.

/end of rant, firmly cementing nerd status

They don't disprove anything. They are only two among dozens that have died.

In terms of marketing big games and setting them apart from the piles of cheaper, simpler titles, the panel discussed how Steam creates per-publisher stores to leverage brand loyalty and promote games to users. However, in addressing the rumors of a "premium app store," where big developers could charge more for their games without the distraction of smaller developer's offerings, Yardley said that iTunes' level playing field was a core strength.

Steam's model certainly isn't to the detriment of indie developers. A lot of the content on Steam is from smaller developers and it's a superb platform for them. I've personally bought several indie games from Steam and it's a great way to buy games from smaller developers.

Steam is a great example of online content delivery done correctly. They treat their customers with the respect and trust that they deserve. Right now, it's the number one reason to own a Windows PC. It's a shame that it's fallen to Valve, and not Microsoft, to provide the infrastructure to gamers.

I can see the likes of EA being very pleased with a new method to nickel and dime gamers via the iPhone's in-game payment system...

Why doe it always have to be referred to as "iPhone gaming"- AI? The iPod Touch is surpassing the iPhone day by day. As long the iPhone remains locked into AT&T, it stagnates.

We can always count on you to find some negative (usually dumb) about good Apple news.

The important thing to game devs is that there are 30M of the things. Not what the hell it's called.

As reference there are 46M PSPs and 100M DS and 48M Wiis.

In less than 2 years there almost equal to what Sony sold in five. Granted not everyone is playing games but as someone mentioned...the iPhone has gone Wii. It'll hit 100M rapidly.

I were Sega I'd look at re-entering the hardware biz with a gaming pad/battery pack (dpad, analog sticks and triggers) designed for the iPhone and iPod touch now that the SDK allows access to the connector and selling it with a Dreamcast Sonic game pack.

When the iPhone gets a rev and a faster CPU add the ports and long cables for connecting to a TV and bluetooth connectivity to other iPhone/Sega game pads as additional controllers.

They have the branding to make it work. They could also sell access to their game pad to other developers for like $0.10/game if they made it as functional (solid controls) and the total package as good looking as a PSP for say $50-$100.

Of course they have only one shot to get it right but if they managed they'd sell a good amount of their own dreamcast games and a reasonable amount of interest from IP holders to port old DC titles to the iPhone and new devs with game titles that want analog sticks and buttons to pay that 10 cent royalty. All without the major investment in building their own handheld OR console.

Nintendo, Sony and MS won't build such a pad and no one else has the same kind of console or handheld name recognition (faded as it may be) as Sega. Add in the Sonic franchise and you can see Sega making a "comeback" on top of Apple's platform. Sonic may not be Mario but it does have a following.

Is that it? Wow! I dont' play games much on my iPhone but I have bought plenty just because it was convenient and fairly low priced. I have owned every major GameBoy revision but usually only stick to the Zelda games for those systems. With the original GameBoy I had purchased the most with maybe 6 games total.

With the release of the App Store 9 months ago I have purchased 12 games (not including free ones). I probably have purchased about that many in total for my GameBoy handhelds combined.

I really hope Nintendo and Sony have something waiting in the wings or are working feverishly to produce something phenomenal. If not, I'm afraid that cellphone makers will be pushing them to the bottom of mobile gaming market.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

It sucks and I think Apple should do some more about gaming on the Mac.

What should Apple do: make games themselves or support better GPUs? I think the issue comes down to what is a worthwhile endeavor. Apple hasn't had to make the games for the iPhone OS and they haven't had to beef up the HW to support game play. It just fell into place as the most powerful and advanced handheld gaming platform (HW-wise).

Then there is an issue of where the money is at. I've read that PC gaming is on the decline in favour of consoles and handhelds. However, since knowing Obj-C works for both platforms I'm sure that there will be developers that get it with an IPhone OS game that expand to Mac OS because the cost is now lower than building just for the Mac.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

"And industry analysts say the problems at all carriers are becoming more glaring as the growing popularity of so-called smartphones puts pressure on their networks."

Which would also include Verizon. Yes, they do have the best buildout while AT&T is still stuck with some of the Cingular/AT&T/other patchwork with particularly bad coverage in NYC for some reason. In DC/Baltimore AT&T is pretty solid.

I've read that PC gaming is on the decline in favour of consoles and handhelds.

PC gaming waxes and wanes vs the consoles. On the other hand, PC games is relegated to the sad little single book case at Game Stop like Mac games used to be (now missing entirely).

A Mac gaming resurgence is not likely to happen IMHO. More likely is that we'll see iPhone titles appear on the aTV and the aTV transition to a ARM Cortex A9 based SoC capable of 1080p video playback (Ti demoed one at MWC).

That also makes the aTV somewhat resistant into turning into a lightweight mac as opposed to using Atom/Ion since it would likely run the iPhone OSX vs the mac OSX. Copying an intel mac kext to it won't do you much good.

I could be wrong and Apple might make the next gen aTV Atom based. It's not like it makes much difference to developer using XCode.